Looking back at it I'm not sure it'll win any plaudits for maintainability, but it was a great tool for learning the power and limitations of closures.

It's like saying why do we need lexical variables, as long as we care about chosing the right package-namespaces we can achieve the same.

I appreciate the analogy, but if you look back, I wasn't reaching any conclusions with my thoughts about closures, just examining the evidence.

As with many other ideas that suddenly gain currency -- despite usually having been around in one form or another since the '60s or early '70s -- I like to examine 'new ideas' every so often and try to see through the theory-wash, marketing speak and hyperbole, and reach my own conclusions as to their usefulness and importance.

Through this process I have avoided getting swept alone by many a fad that has subsequently shown itself to be of dubious value. I tend to apply the same criteria to most everything in life.

As far as closures go; I think I reached the conclusion that they are a valuable addition to languages so long as their implementation does not exact too high a price on the performance of the rest of that language.

Done right, they are a useful addition to the toolbox; but I wouldn't want to throw out (or ham-string performance-wise) too many of the other tools in the box to accommodate them.

Continuation passing on the other hand seems to exact too high a price.

I think it's also part of the feature competition.

That's essentially what I was wondering. Are closures just another 'we must have that too' kick.

I think they are somewhat more than that.

Saying this you might have noticed that some participants in this thread didn't really know what closure.

Indeed. But that is also true of many a dissertation on them that you'll find online.

But when I first encountered SmallTalk's block arguments; their significance was lost on me also.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Comment on Re^6: Real life uses for closures. (update: disambiguation)

Ada Lovelace for the palindrome
Albert Einstein for having smelly feet
Alfred Nobel for his contribution to battlefield science
Burkhard Heim for providing the missing link between science and mysticism
Claude Shannnon for riding a unicycle at night at MIT
Donald Knuth for being such a great organist
Edward Teller for being the template for Dr. Strangelove
Edwin Hubble for pretending to be a pipe-smoking English gentleman
Erwin Schrödinger for cruelty to cats
Hedy Lamarr for weaponizing pianos
Hugh Everett for immortality, especially for cats
Isaac Newton for his occult studies
Kikunae Ikeda for discovering the secrets of soy sauce
Larry Wall for his website
Louis Camille Maillard for discovering why steaks taste good
Marie Curie for the shiny stuff
Nikola Tesla for the cool cars
Paul Dirac for speaking one word per hour when socializing
Richard Feynman for his bongo skills
Robert Oppenheimer for his in-depth knowledge of the Bhagavad Gita
Rusi P Taleyarkhan for Cold Fusion
Sigmund Freud for his Ménage ā trois
Theodor W Adorno for his contribution to the reception of jazz
Wilhelm Röntgen for the foundations of body scanners
Yulii Borisovich Khariton for the Tsar Bomba
Other (please explain why)